Ashwin Rajadesingan
Huan Liu
ABSTRACT
Sarcasm is a nuanced form of language in which individuals state the opposite of what is implied. With this intentional ambiguity, sarcasm detection has always been a challenging task, even for humans. Current approaches to automatic sarcasm detection rely primarily on lexical and linguistic cues. This paper aims to address the difficult task of sarcasm detection on Twitter by leveraging behavioral traits intrinsic to users expressing sarcasm. We identify such traits using the user's past tweets. We employ theories from behavioral and psychological studies to construct a behavioral modeling framework tuned for detecting sarcasm. We evaluate our framework and demonstrate its efficiency in identifying sarcastic tweets.
- M. Basavanna. Dictionary of psychology. Allied Publishers, 2000.Google Scholar
- F. Bi and J. A. Konstan. Customer service 2.0: Where social computing meets customer relations. IEEE Computer, 45(11):93--95, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. S. Cheang and M. D. Pell. Recognizing sarcasm without language: A cross-linguistic study of english and cantonese. Pragmatics & Cognition, 19(2), 2011.Google Scholar
- D. Davidov, O. Tsur, and A. Rappoport. Semi-supervised recognition of sarcastic sentences in twitter and amazon. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, pages 107--116. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. L. Dress, R. J. Kreuz, K. E. Link, and G. M. Caucci. Regional variation in the use of sarcasm. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27(1):71--85, 2008.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R.-E. Fan, K.-W. Chang, C.-J. Hsieh, X.-R. Wang, and C.-J. Lin. Liblinear: A library for large linear classification. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9:1871--1874, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Fawcett. An introduction toROC\ analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 27(8):861 -- 874, 2006.ROC\ Analysis in Pattern Recognition. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Flesch. A new readability yardstick. Journal of applied psychology, 32(3):221, 1948.Google Scholar
- R. W. Gibbs. Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and symbol, 15(1--2):5--27, 2000.Google Scholar
- R. González-Ibánez, S. Muresan, and N. Wacholder. Identifying sarcasm in twitter: A closer look. In ACL (Short Papers), pages 581--586. Citeseer, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. P. Grice. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan, editors, Syntax and semantics, volume 3. New York: Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar
- H. P. Grice. Some further notes on logic and conversation. In P. Cole, editor, Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, pages 113--127. 1978.Google Scholar
- M. Hall, E. Frank, G. Holmes, B. Pfahringer, P. Reutemann, and I. H. Witten. The Weka data mining software: an update. ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter, 11(1):10--18, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Y. Hu, K. Talamadupula, S. Kambhampati, et al. Dude, srsly?: The surprisingly formal nature of twitter's language. In ICWSM, 2013.Google Scholar
- J. P. Kincaid, R. P. Fishburne Jr, R. L. Rogers, and B. S. Chissom. Derivation of new readability formulas (automated readability index, fog count and flesch reading ease formula) for navy enlisted personnel. Technical report, DTIC Document, 1975.Google Scholar
- E. Kouloumpis, T. Wilson, and J. Moore. Twitter sentiment analysis: The good the bad and the omg! ICWSM, 11:538--541, 2011.Google Scholar
- R. J. Kreuz and G. M. Caucci. Lexical influences on the perception of sarcasm. In Proceedings of the Workshop on computational approaches to Figurative Language, pages 1--4. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. J. Kreuz and S. Glucksberg. How to be sarcastic: The echoic reminder theory of verbal irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(4):374, 1989.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Kumon-Nakamura, S. Glucksberg, and M. Brown. How about another piece of pie: The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(1):3, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Liebrecht, F. Kunneman, and A. van den Bosch. The perfect solution for detecting sarcasm in tweets\# not. WASSA 2013, page 29, 2013.Google Scholar
- W. Liu and D. Ruths. What's in a name? using first names as features for gender inference in twitter. In Analyzing Microtext: 2013 AAAI Spring Symposium, 2013.Google Scholar
- G. H. McLaughlin. Smog grading: A new readability formula. Journal of reading, 12(8):639--646, 1969.Google Scholar
- J. Oller, John W. Scoring methods and difficulty levels for cloze tests of proficiency in english as a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 56(3):pp. 151--158, 1972.Google ScholarCross Ref
- O. Owoputi, B. O'Connor, C. Dyer, K. Gimpel, N. Schneider, and N. A. Smith. Improved part-of-speech tagging for online conversational text with word clusters. In Proceedings of NAACL-HLT, pages 380--390, 2013.Google Scholar
- B. Pang and L. Lee. Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and trends in information retrieval, 2(1--2):1--135, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, et al. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in python. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12:2825--2830, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. W. Pennebaker, M. E. Francis, and R. J. Booth. Linguistic inquiry and word count: Liwc 2001. Mahway: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, page 71, 2001.Google Scholar
- A. Reyes, P. Rosso, and D. Buscaldi. From humor recognition to irony detection: The figurative language of social media. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 74:1--12, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Riloff, A. Qadir, P. Surve, and Silva. Sarcasm as contrast between a positive sentiment and negative situation. In EMNLP, pages 704--714. ACL, 2013.Google Scholar
- P. Rockwell. Lower, slower, louder: Vocal cues of sarcasm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(5):483--495, 2000.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Rockwell. Empathy and the expression and recognition of sarcasm by close relations or strangers. Perceptual and motor skills, 97(1):251--256, 2003.Google Scholar
- P. Rockwell. The effects of cognitive complexity and communication apprehension on the expression and recognition of sarcasm. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, 2007.Google Scholar
- P. Rockwell and E. M. Theriot. Culture, gender, and gender mix in encoders of sarcasm: A self-assessment analysis. Communication Research Reports, 18(1):44 -- 52, 2001.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Strapparava and A. Valitutti. Wordnet affect: an affective extension of wordnet. In LREC, volume 4, pages 1083--1086, 2004.Google Scholar
- J. Tepperman, D. R. Traum, and S. Narayanan. " yeah right": sarcasm recognition for spoken dialogue systems. In INTERSPEECH, 2006.Google Scholar
- M. Thelwall, K. Buckley, G. Paltoglou, D. Cai, and A. Kappas. Sentiment strength detection in short informal text. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12):2544--2558, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Toplak and A. N. Katz. On the uses of sarcastic irony. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10):1467--1488, 2000.Google ScholarCross Ref
- O. Tsur, D. Davidov, and A. Rappoport. Icwsm-a great catchy name: Semi-supervised recognition of sarcastic sentences in online product reviews. In ICWSM, 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Utsumi. Verbal irony as implicit display of ironic environment: Distinguishing ironic utterances from nonirony. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(12):1777--1806.Google ScholarCross Ref
- W. Wang, L. Chen, K. Thirunarayan, and A. P. Sheth. Cursing in english on twitter. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing, pages 415--425. ACM, 2014. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. B. Warriner, V. Kuperman, and M. Brysbaert. Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 english lemmas. Behavior research methods, pages 1--17, 2013.Google Scholar
- R. Zafarani and H. Liu. Connecting users across social media sites: a behavioral-modeling approach. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 41--49. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Sarcasm Detection on Twitter: A Behavioral Modeling Approach
Recommendations
Signaling sarcasm
The use of hashtags such as #sarcasm reduces the further use of linguistic markers of sarcasm in tweets.Hashtags such as #sarcasm appear to be the extralinguistic equivalent of non-verbal expressions in live interaction.Sarcastic hashtags are 90% ...
Information resonance on Twitter: watching Iran
SOMA '10: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Social Media AnalyticsTwitter has undoubtedly caught the attention of both the general public, and academia as a microblogging service worthy of study and attention. Twitter has several features that sets it apart from other social media/networking sites, including its 140 ...
Twitter Sarcasm Detection Exploiting a Context-Based Model
Proceedings, Part I, of the 16th International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering --- WISE 2015 - Volume 9418Automatically detecting sarcasm in twitter is a challenging task because sarcasm transforms the polarity of an apparently positive or negative utterance into its opposite. Previous work focus on feature modeling of the single tweet, which limit the ...
Comments